Archived: Bluebird Care Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft

Bluebird Care Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people in their own homes. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection there were 54 people receiving personal care from the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People told us they felt safe when carers visited them and felt they could rely on the service to keep them safe. The service carried out risk assessments and put in place measures to reduce the risk of people coming to harm.

People told us they benefitted from having regular carers they knew well, and that the carers always arrived to support them. People told us staff were kind, caring and thoughtful.

Staff were recruited safely and had appropriate training for the role.

Medicines were administered, managed and monitored safely.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People told us they knew how to make complaints and felt confident that the service would act on these. There was a suitable complaints policy in place and a system for investigating and responding to these.

Since our last inspection, the new management of the service had implemented a number of new systems to monitor, assess and identify shortfalls in the quality of the care provided. They had taken action to address previous shortfalls identified and this had resulted in positive changes being made in the service. This was reflected in improvements in people’s feedback about the service the received.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection and update –

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 23 September 2021).

The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

Why we inspected

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 8 July 2021. Breaches of legal requirements were found and we issued a warning notice telling the provider what they needed to do and by when. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve.

We undertook this focused inspection to check they had followed their action plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements.

Bluebird Care Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft is a domiciliary care agency, providing personal care to people living in their own homes. There were 35 people receiving personal care at the time of the inspection.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The provider did not have an effective system to monitor and assess the quality and safety of the service people received. Record keeping in areas such as staffing, safeguarding and complaints was not robust and did not support the delivery of safe and effective care.

At our previous inspection we found some systems for checking the quality and safety of the service were not in place putting people at risk of harm. At that inspection this was a breach of the Regulations. At this inspection improvements were still needed to make quality assurance systems more effective, and the provider remained in breach.

Complaints had not been recorded or responded to appropriately. The provider had a complaints procedure: however, complaints made, along with lessons learned and action taken had not been recorded.

Safeguarding concerns were not always addressed appropriately. The provider had a safeguarding procedure; however, records were not kept of safeguarding investigations to demonstrate lessons learned to prevent a reoccurrence.

There were insufficient staff to meet people’s needs consistently. Commissioned care packages for two care workers to undertake people’s planned care visits were reduced by the provider to one care worker attending as they were unable to fulfil the care hours needed. We received concerns from people and their relatives of late and missed care visits.

People were supported by a staff team who were safely recruited and who had the relevant training and qualifications to safely support them.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection (and update)

This service was registered with us on 7 October 2019 and this is their first comprehensive inspection. We carried out a ‘focussed’ inspection on 16 November 2020 to look at the key questions of Safe and Well-Led only. That inspection did not result in a rating; however, we did find a breach of Regulation 17: Good Governance. There was ineffective governance and oversight in place. At this inspection enough improvement had not been made and the provider was still in breach of the regulations.

You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

Why we inspected

This service was registered with us on 7 October 2019 and this is the first ‘ratings’ inspection.

Enforcement

We are mindful of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our regulatory function. This meant we took account of the exceptional circumstances arising as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic when considering what enforcement action was necessary and proportionate to keep people safe as a result of this inspection. We will continue to discharge our regulatory enforcement functions required to keep people safe and to hold providers to account where it is necessary for us to do so.

We have identified breaches in relation to staffing, the submitting of notifications and governance at this inspection.

Full information about CQC's regulatory response to the more serious concerns found during inspections is

added to reports after any representations and appeals have been concluded.

Follow up

We will request an action plan for the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information, we may inspect sooner.

Bluebird Care Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft is a domiciliary care agency, providing personal care to people living in their own homes. There were 15 people receiving personal care at the time of the inspection. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People’s risks including those associated with their health conditions had been assessed and mitigated, and safe management of medicines systems had been implemented.

We found recruitment systems were robust and staff were supported on the whole effectively in their roles through planned supervision and unannounced spot checks. Most staff informed us they were content with the training provided but some staff found the induction training was rushed. People using the service told us that the staff were kind and spent the agreed amount of time with them. This was confirmed by staff although some staff considered that they did not always have enough traveling time between call visits.

The service had an IT system which supported the planning and monitoring of the service with regard to staff leaving and arriving at the persons home. However, the service did not at the time of inspection have a policy for the recording of late visits or missed visits. This was being addressed by the provider and the new manager commencing in post later in the week of our inspection.

We found systems for checking the quality and safety of the service had not as yet been fully established. Complaints were recorded in the relevant care plan and the action taken including the provider being aware of the duty of candour. However, there was no file where complaints and compliments were recorded making finding this information difficult. The service did have a policy for safeguarding and staff had received training in this subject. The service did not have a safeguarding log where safeguarding information was recorded. We found relevant information regarding safeguarding was recorded within the daily notes and care plans.

People who used the service and relatives were asked for their views from care plan reviews and telephone calls from the senior staff to check upon their well-being. Information was used to improve the service and make any necessary changes. Feedback from people who used the service and their relatives was positive. They described being involved in making decisions about their care and told us they felt safe and comfortable in the company of the staff who knew them well and were reliable and competent. At the time of our inspection the first survey of the service performance was being planned.

Staff followed safe infection control processes which protected people from the risks of infection and, specifically Covid-19.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The service learnt lessons and had asked for the support of the Bluebird organisation to carry out a service governance audit and the provider had acted upon the findings.

We have made recommendations for the recording of and management of late and missed care call visits, complaints and safeguarding.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

This service was registered with us on 07 October 2019 and this is the first inspection.

Why we inspected

We received concerns in relation to the management of risk, staff training and possible missed care call visits. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those areas of risk. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only.

We reviewed the information we held about the service. No areas of concern were identified in the other key questions. We therefore did not inspect them.

We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvement. Please see the safe section of this full report.

You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

Follow-up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.